Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
of the budget office, peter orszag is our guest. actress jada pinkett smith and kelly reilly from the new movie "flight." it's friday, november 16th. and "starting point" begins right now. morning, welcome, everybody, our starting point this morning, israel mobilizing thousands of troops for a possible full-scale ground war with hamas. violence in the region intensifying overnight. the palestinian militants launched hundreds of rockets into israeli territory. air raid sirens sounding in tel aviv. that's the very first time that's happened since the gulf war. israelis responded by pounding hundreds of terror sites as they call them in gaza with artillery fire. ben wedeman reporting live now from jerusalem. we know, ben, that the israelis have called up 16,000 reservists. what exactly are they going to be doing? >> well, what they'll be doing is heading down into the area around gaza. very similar to what we saw in 2008, 2009, when they had a similar outbreak of violence between the two sides. we also know that there's a lot of heavy armor, lots of tanks being transported to the area around gaza,
consequences. i like to look at it from a quote from peter orszag that the big drivers are economic forces particularly in the united states politics to mitigate these economic forces has exacerbated. so to create much more concentration will try to soften the blow. instead it is the excel arab. who are the super rich? what do they think about the rest of us? the way i will lead characterize them is the seventh global of flood geeks. this is like the downtown abbey said the. their hard-working people. but you have less leisure at the top men in the middle. hard-working people tend to think of themselves as self-made. i use that as a loose concept. like bill gates orman romney but you made your own business you do not inherit that business that may do the multimillionaire. it is important for now one of the things i found interesting that this is the age of mastery of members. that seems to make sense when you think of silicon valley or wall street but in your minds iu imagine the russian oligarch you imagine somebody in a fancy italian suit to and this is true but he probably has a ph.d. i
consequences which are not quite so benign. the way i like to look at it, and this is a quote from peter orszag, how he sees it is the big drivers are probably the economic forces but the issue is that particularly in the united states the politics, instead of trying to mitigate these very powerful economic forces, has exacerbated them. even if you have economic forces creating more concentration at the very top you expect politics to try to soften the blow, financial institutions to soften the blow and instead it is accelerating and to me that is about right. who are the superrich guys and what do they think of the rest of us? i would say the way i would characterize them as a group and this is a global group, these are the global alpha peaks. they do tend to be -- this is different from a kind of downtown abby set up, speaks to the economic drivers as a phenomenon. these are really hard working people and one of the interesting things when you look even at the data about the hours worked is for the first time people have counted this work of thing you have less leisure at the very top than yo
administration advisers to give their opinions of the fiscal cliff, and peter orszag was president obama's budget director. next, they are interviewed by peter cook for about a half hour. >> >> the fiscal problems and the tax issues. we have some people. we're talking about finding ground. i am talking with peter orszag sa. we have professor martin feldstein. he has commented on these issues, and donald merrin. we have three experts to talk about these issues. walk us through this minefield and see where they year might be common ground. peter orszag, let me start with you, and the basic question about whether or not tax revenue has to be part of this conversation to begin with and whether the two sites, whether there is more common ground. >> tax revenue has to be part of the solution here, but because of the underlying budget math, but also because of the election that was just held and the desire of at least the administration to obtain that additional revenue. on the substance, the point i would make is whatever comes out of this fiscal cliff arrangements, i will now step out of the bounds of
and we are joined now by peter orszag budget director for president obama and vice-chairman of citigroup in charge of corporate and investor banking and we have got professor martin feldstein of harvard university of course was a economic adviser to president ronald reagan, and then has commented on these issues and read about these issues and donald is the director of the urban brookings tax policy center and former acting director of the congressional budget office as well. so we have three experts to talk about these issues and walk us through this minefield of tax policy and see where there might be common ground where the conversations of the white house could be ending up. peter, let me start with you. and the basic question about whether or not tax revenue has to be a part of this part of the conversation to begin with and whether the two sides were there is more common ground than they think. >> first obviously i think the tax revenue has to be part of the solution here both because the underlying budget but also because the election that was just held and the desire and the admi
interesting ideas about how to improve social security. we have the pure diamond peter orszag plan, a whole bunch of other things, they're all good. we're not entering this game. we're not playing on social security because we will lose if we do. that was very smart for 2005 but i think as we, as we go into a different era, different political configuration, i think we can have a little more, more of the occur ran to say, social security has changed. basically it has been changed every other year since it was created. it was changed about six times by franklin roosevelt. it was changed many ways to adjust women entering it -- changed the to bias against african-american workers. changed to reflect the greater role of women in the workplace and so forth. it has been changed dramatically. we should be unafraid to be willing to change and improve these programs, not just to cut their costs but to say, what are they doing well and how do we really achieve these, how do we better achieve the goals of social security and medicare? last week i read after the election david brooks wrote a column wh
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)